If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

'Monsanto Protection Act' slips silently through US Congress

The US House of Representatives quietly passed a last-minute addition to the Agricultural Appropriations Bill for 2013 last week - including a provision protecting genetically modified seeds from litigation in the face of health risks.

The rider, which is officially known as the Farmer Assurance Provision, has been derided by opponents of biotech lobbying as the “Monsanto Protection Act,” as it would strip federal courts of the authority to immediately halt the planting and sale of genetically modified (GMO) seed crop regardless of any consumer health concerns.

Re: 'Monsanto Protection Act' slips silently through US Congress

I remember when asbestos was the building product of the future. Won't burn, won't rot. Can be formed into almost anything. No one even questioned that it was safe. It has been in use for a long time... just not on that scale...

Re: 'Monsanto Protection Act' slips silently through US Congress

It doesn't protect from prosecution from what I can tell. It stops people from suing at time of product launch or USDA/FDA approval and halting sales at that time. It's only active for 6 months so I don't see what all the hooplah is about. The big question is, how does a bill like that get introduced anonymously.... that's the fishy part.

Re: 'Monsanto Protection Act' slips silently through US Congress

As to the original post in answer to Bob J's question, if GMOs are safe they probably still don't want to spend millions of dollars in litigation defending them. Now I don't agree with a law preventing litigation completely, but I can't say I've read the document to know how far it goes. There are laws protecting doctors and insurance companies etc etc protecting them from lawsuits as well. It's a balancing act between preventing malicious and fraudulent suits while not restricting those with just cause. I won't begin to know where that line falls in this case, but it does set off some alarm bells.